Blog

The Rare Earth Conundrum

Electric cars are all the rage today, but some of the smartest people I know believe that moving towards electric vehicles is a terrible idea. Looking casually as an outsider at the unappealing economics of electric vehicles (the need for a new and immensely expensive infrastructure, cars that cost much more than either traditional gas engines or hybrids, limited ranges and long recharging times), I find it hard to understand why the Obama administration is pushing electric cars.

One argument I’ve heard is “national security,” the idea being that electric vehicles would make the United States less dependent on imported oil. Be careful what you wish for, however, because if electric cars become a mainstay, we may be trading one dependence for another that is even more troubling. Ninety-five percent of the world’s output of rare-earth metals today comes from one country: China. By some estimates, demand will outstrip supply within five years. At least with oil we know there are fifty years of oil reserves readily available. Moreover, oil is produced all over the world, limiting the monopoly power of any one country.

Katherine Bourzac’s interesting piece in MIT’s Technology Review profiles the plight of the only active rare-earth producing mine in the Western Hemisphere.

It is quite possible that scientists will figure out alternatives that lessen the need for rare-earth metals. If not, add the words dysprosium, praseodymium, and terbium to your vocabulary, because you will be hearing a lot about these elements in the future, and the news is not likely to be good.

MikeM

May 11, 2011 @ 3:57pm

I think I remember reading a few months ago that the U.S. has significant rare earths in the ground, but it hasn't been economically viable to mine them here. China can mine them cheaply and sell them to the rest of the world. Certainly if electric cars become a huge market, that will change.

That's not to say that the point still holds that this isn't that much different from the patroleum problem in the long run.

headhunt23

May 11, 2011 @ 3:58pm

The greenies have been trying to use doom scenario sticks and pixie dust carrots for 40+ years now. This is just another example.

By all means, we should invest wisely into research of renewables and less invasive alternatives, but let's avoid bringing half baked, more expensive and most likely counter-productive "solutions" forward on a mass scale and pushing them down our throats.

Ryan Money

May 11, 2011 @ 4:10pm

What are your thoughts then or your "friends" thoughts on natural gas vehicls NVG's?

Dave

May 11, 2011 @ 4:11pm

Good post, and I've learned a bit about the role rare-earth metals play in electric cars' operation. After reading a previous post on this blog, 'A Crude Guess About the Future' I am falling on the side of scientists figuring something out. This extract from the Crude... article is what I'm referring to specifically:

"But I bet if I could conjure up oilmen from the past, they’d tell me that thanks to the wondrous, futuristic science of 1919, most of the oil that the laws of engineering and physics would permit man to cost-effectively extract had been discovered, and that supplying 800 million vehicles worldwide would be a mathematical and physical impossibility, by orders of magnitude."

It seems possible that the rare-earth conundrum may parallel the oil conundrum. And, while rare-earth metals, like oil, are certainly limited in supply (to quote the Crude post), "human creativity is limitless."

Read more...

jblog

May 11, 2011 @ 4:24pm

"Ninety-five percent of the world’s output of rare-earth metals today comes from one country: China."

True, that's a today statement. Right now, a rare earth mine in California is being reopened, where new technologies will allow the minerals to be mined in a cleaner, more efficient and economical fashion than in the past. This could substantially reduce our dependence on China for these minerals.

Joe

May 11, 2011 @ 4:25pm

What is the availability of rare earth metals in space? Were we to start mining asteroids (either near-earth objects or going further afield), could we obtain useful amounts of rare earth metals there?

Tom Maguire

May 11, 2011 @ 4:59pm

Even though predicting the future of cars is probably a fool's errand, it sounds like it's going to be Hydrogen Fuel Cell technology. It's moving forward in the EU but Palladium is needed in the Hydrogen refining process.
Electric cars really only seem viable for specific uses and not as All Purpose Vehicles like how today's gas powered internal combustion engine function.
I suspect The Future will entail families owning different types of cars for different purposes. An around town plug-in electric that can charge at a Starbucks (that's happening). A Hydrogen Fuel Car that can go longer distances between fill-ups as filling stations will be few and far between for the foreseeable future.

Matthew

May 11, 2011 @ 8:17pm

I look forward to this "Future" when everyone has so much money they can buy multiple cars and consume energy in the most efficient manner at all times. I wish I didn't have to drive my full sized 4 door truck by myself, but when my family of 5 loads it up with luggage and bikes and car seats and strollers for a weekend vacation to Grandma's no other car would serve except a big SUV. I'd be happy to add a Smart ForTwo to my driveway for my commute to work. Am I going to get a grant to cover the purchase cost, as well as the increased insurance I will pay for carrying an extra vehicle on my policy?

James

May 11, 2011 @ 8:50pm

Somehow a lot of people (including many of my neighbors) manage to do the two cars (or more) just fine now, with both cars being large gas-guzzlers. And they can afford to leave them idling in the driveway for 15 minutes before leaving on the 5 mile trip to their WalMart job.

I'd also give odds that my two vehicles cost less to buy, less to insure, and less to operate than your one "full-sized" pickup.

Jason

May 11, 2011 @ 4:33pm

A bit Malthusian, Levitt. As you already know, our oil supply was completely consumed years ago when gas was 25¢ a gallon and reserves would only last a couple of decades.

You can't be serious.

KeithR

May 11, 2011 @ 4:33pm

Regardless of one's view on anthropogenic pollution and climate change we should be driving forward (excuse the pun) to more efficient power supplies in all industries; which, for the most part is happening. Of course there will be obstacles and often the solution is an economic opportunity for someone. Concerns such as National Security are a pathetic excuse in the face of a globalized economy. If a nation or company can't compete in a paradigm they become irrelevant, not "too big to fail".

Johnny J

May 11, 2011 @ 4:36pm

The Feds think that electric cars, ethanol and all the other contraptions they push will keep us from spoiling the air and they are will to rat hole unlimited tax money trying to prove it. Do-gooding is always a self serving pleasure, especially for the economically illiterate.

RogerP

May 11, 2011 @ 4:40pm

Apologies for trivia, but apparently they built the Sun City Casino and entertainment resort on top of South Africa's most viable monazite (rare earth) deposit.

I'm not sure who should be kicking whom.

Sandjar

May 11, 2011 @ 4:50pm

Even if other countries start mining for rare earths (which mind you are not actually rare), I wonder what the environmental impact of that is going to be. We're still going to be excavating stuff out of the ground and dispersing it around the world. It's just going to be like oil.

Mikemoon

May 11, 2011 @ 4:51pm

Joe, asteroids are not known to contain high levels of rare earth metals. They are however rich in rare asteroid metals. I believe Aperture Science looked into mining them but found it unfeasible during the late 90s.

James

May 11, 2011 @ 5:35pm

Should have gotten your facts straight before writing.

"new and immensely expensive infrastructure"? It's called an electric plug: my house has dozens.

"cars that cost much more"? Nissan Leaf MSRP: $33720. Chevy Volt MSRP: $40280. Average new car price, 2010: $29217. Tell us again how electric cars cost so much more.

Of course there's the Tesla, but consider the market it's selling in. Porsche 911: $77800 to $245000. Ferrari California: $192,000. Bugatti Veyron: $2250880. In its market, the Tesla is a low-end economy car.

As others point out, rare earths aren't all that rare. It's just that China has monopolized the limited market thanks to low labor costs and lax environmental regulations. And where's your vaunted human ingenuity? If we can't get rare earths, won't we just figure out how to build good electric motors without them?

David Leppik

May 11, 2011 @ 5:52pm

Rare earths aren't rare, they're just expensive to process. During the cold war, the US lead worldwide production. Then we found it was cheaper for China to mine and process the minerals, so our production dried up.

While there are some minerals I'm concerned about long term for electric cars, the rare earths aren't among them

Eric M. Jones

May 11, 2011 @ 6:10pm

My favorite stock-picker has been hammering me for years to get on the REE bandwagon, but I really believe that REE-alternatives are easy develop. As has been noted, the fact that China supplies 95% of the REEs is a matter of cost, not a lucky distribution of RE elements.

"UFO physicist" Stanton Friedman tells the story that a few years after the "Roswell" incident, the nascent Air Force "materials" lab located in hanger 59 at Wright Patterson AFB announced the discovery of samarium-neodymium-GodKnowsWhat-cobalt magnets. This seemed to come out of nowhere and shocked the physics community. Suspicious....

At the risk of a sharp rebuke (since I posted it yesterday), you really need to see this: check out this 1916 Chevy Volt!:
http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads/Gas_Electric_Automobile.jpg

Rich U.

May 11, 2011 @ 8:34pm

Anyone interested in an electric vehicle charging time breakthrough should read this: